On May 15, the "Advisory Panel on Reconstruction of the Legal Basis for Security," a private advisory body to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, submitted a report to the Prime Minister featuring its stance about allowing Japan to exercise the right of collective self-defense. At a press conference held that day, Prime Minister Abe confirmed his intention to prepare the legal framework, stating, "We have a responsibility to protect the lives of our citizens in any situation." The LDP won the recent general election and was restored to power on a platform of moving forward on security policy. The Party is committed to fulfill the will of the people and is bound to engage in repeated, concerted consultations with the government and New Komeito.
This is the second report issued by the Advisory Panel on Reconstruction of the Legal Basis for Security. The first was in June 2008. It notes that "the security environment surrounding Japan has changed dramatically even in the few years since the Panel submitted its previous report" and argues "adequate responses can no longer be taken under the constitutional interpretation to date." The Constitution allows for the right of self-defense "to the minimum extent necessary," and the Panel interprets this as including the right of collective self-defense, concluding that its exercise should, therefore, be allowed.
The report says that three conditions must be satisfied for the right of collective self-defense to be exercised: (1) a foreign country that is in a close relationship with Japan comes under an armed attack; (2) the situation could pose a serious impact on the security of Japan; and (3) force is used to the minimum extent necessary, having obtained an explicit request or consent from the country under attack.
It also says that any exercise should require the approval of the Diet either before or after the fact, and the consent of any third countries that must be transited.
In addition to the right of collective self-defense, the report provides opinions on the other five areas of constitutional interpretation: (1) participation in collective security measures of the United Nations entailing military measures; (2) theory of the so-called "Ittaika" (joint) use of force; (3) cooperation and use of weapons in UN peacekeeping operations (PKO); (4) protection and rescue, etc. of Japanese nationals abroad and international security cooperation; and (5) response to an infringement which does not constitute an armed attack.
It argues that the use of weapons by the self-defense forces "should not be regarded as constituting use of force" if they are used to come to the aid of geographically distant units or personnel under attack ("kaketsuke-keigo") or to remove attempts to obstruct its missions. Response to "gray zone situations," for example, the infringement of an outlying island by an armed group masquerading as fishermen that does not rise to the level of an armed attack, should, according to the report, "be permitted under the Constitution to the extent that it is legal under international law."
